Talk:Fighting Tongue Slash
Tonque or Water Uh, Tongue or water? Simant (talk) 01:21, October 16, 2009 (UTC) :I don't know what the anime made of it, but it is clearly stated in the third databook that he uses Fukasaku tongue. --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 15:53, October 16, 2009 (UTC) ::Tongue or oil or water? Are you sure that the language does not seem. :::Tongue. --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 17:02, October 16, 2009 (UTC) tongue in manga, water in anime :I don't know for you guys, but for me it seems like water - in the anime and in the manga. But in the Third Databook it is said that it is tonque. Looks like water in both anime and manga. ::::Yeah it's weird. Both in the anime and manga it looks like water, but if ShounenSuki says that in the databook it says tongue... it must be like that. Could it be another pun Shounen? A pun like the ones Kishi likes to use? Or better it is to ask: does the jap word for tongue have other meanings than tongue? (I am thinking water or some liquid:)) - MadaraU (talk) 20:05, October 22, 2009 (UTC) :::::The only pun here is in the name of the technique. Although it's translated as War of Words Decapitation here, the kanji literally mean Tongue Battle Decapitation. The databook is very clear, with no possible puns, double meanings, or mistakes. Fukasaku uses his tongue. :::::I think the reason it looks like water is because of the odd use of angles. In the manga, the tongue looks a lot like a jet of water, becoming wider at the end. However, if you check the second frame, you can see the tongue is the same thickness everywhere. The water spray effect is likely the debris caused by the cutting. --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 21:12, October 22, 2009 (UTC) Tongue or water? Um, the people who write the databooks must be flipping idiots if they think that's his tongue in the manga. IT'S WATER IN BOTH THE ANIME AND THE MANGA!!!! Seriously, I trust the databooks about as much as I trust the "Naruto Fanon Wiki." It's clearly water. Water. Water. Everywhere! (talk) 20:03, March 17, 2010 (UTC) :The information from the Databooks come from Kishimoto himself not anyone else and if he says its a tounge then its a tounge.--Deva 27 (talk) 20:08, March 17, 2010 (UTC) Speaking of databoooks, does anyone where how I can read them? And how do we know that the databook info comes from Kishi himself?? (talk) 20:23, March 17, 2010 (UTC) :Look at popular Naruto forums. they usually have them translated. I don't believe they've ever officially been translated though. ¥ Super Novice Talk 2 Me ¥ 20:23, March 17, 2010 (UTC) Seriously, people, actually READ chapter 376. How could anyone mistake that huge(WATER)splash in that one panel for a tongue? And I still don't think Kishimoto writes the databooks, which is why I don't give a Shino about most of the "data" in them. (talk) 20:30, March 17, 2010 (UTC) :I thought it was water at first too, but the databooks are an official source so it will not be changed.--Deva 27 (talk) 20:37, March 17, 2010 (UTC) I don't consider them official, but.... (talk) 20:44, March 17, 2010 (UTC) I'M STILL NOT CONVINCED that it's a tongue (or that Kishi writes the databooks for that matter), but there ain't much I can do about it. (talk) 20:44, March 17, 2010 (UTC) Guess I'll stop arguing now =P :# Kishimoto-sensei writes the databooks, there is no arguing about that. It is as certain as the fact he writes the manga. :# The technique isn't called Fighting Tongue Slash for nothing. :# Although the first frame where we see this technique looks a bit odd, you should check out the following frames. You can clearly see that what is coming from Fukasaku's mouth is too straight to be a jet of water. There is also no water effect where it cuts. It is a tongue. : --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 20:54, March 17, 2010 (UTC) Still not convinced. Not gonna argue though... (talk) 21:02, March 17, 2010 (UTC) :I would prefer you did argue, though. It might lead to an improved article in the future. After all, you believe the current information to be incorrect. --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 21:40, March 17, 2010 (UTC) It just seems like a lot of the databook stuff (like the tongue thing or Earth Grudge Fear) doesn't really sound like something Kishi would write. Maybe that particular part wasn't written by Kishi, or maybe it was, but he hadn't read his own manga in so long that he forgot whether it was water or a tongue. (talk) 17:25, March 18, 2010 (UTC) :Stuff that sounds odd in English isn't necessarily going to sound odd in Japanese. ''~SnapperT '' 21:54, March 18, 2010 (UTC) ::I would also like to point out that Kishimoto-sensei seems to be infamous in the manga business for being unable to delegate work to his assistants. He apparently tries to do all the work on his own. ::Also Snapper2 is right, what sounds odd in English doesn't necessarily sound odd in Japanese. --ShounenSuki (talk | ) 22:09, March 18, 2010 (UTC) :::So allegedly, something makes perfect sense in his head and he tells his assistants to do this and not explain it? Would explain somethings...--TheUltimate3 (talk) 22:11, March 18, 2010 (UTC) ::::I believe the allegations are that he doesn't even do that. From what I remember of the assistant spotlights in the manga volumes, the only real jobs are doing background stuff and filling in blacks. Diminishes the number of scapegoats if you ask me. ''~SnapperT '' 22:20, March 18, 2010 (UTC) Talk:Fukasaku's Water Release: Water Stream Original Source of Discussion Talk:Fukasaku's Water Release: Water Stream#Legitimacy You wish to discuss, then discuss. Let the games begin.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 03:24, May 24, 2010 (UTC) :Not going to start it? Ok then I'll do it then. *Argument 1) The manga showed the jutsu as a stream of water 2. *Argument 2) The databook says the jutsu was a tongue, end of story. The rest can be found in the link provided above. Let's get er done.--TheUltimate3 (talk) 03:44, May 24, 2010 (UTC) I cannot provide a full argument anymore due to time constraints, though I will give the manga relevant pages here and here (look closely at the middle panel, in my opinion at least). Oh, and I left a message about making the article a little less bias. Thanks by the way. Thomas Finlayson (talk) 03:51, May 24, 2010 (UTC)